From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
cc: Ronan Dunklau <ronan.dunklau@aiven.io>,
        Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
        pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Fix gin index cost estimation
In-reply-to: 
 <CAPpHfdt45WZPcS-R1BYLgixv+vW_+dTom6GHa-XZPu4mtfXTRg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3188617.44csPzL39Z@aivenronan> <4768224.31r3eYUQgx@aivenronan>
 <Y0ZOqzshes0++b1x@paquier.xyz> <12071145.O9o76ZdvQC@aivenronan>
 <CAPpHfdt45WZPcS-R1BYLgixv+vW_+dTom6GHa-XZPu4mtfXTRg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 25 Oct 2022 17:08:58 +0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <4011930.1666707537.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 10:18:57 -0400
Message-ID: <4011931.1666707537@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4011931.1666707537%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> writes:
> I think Tom's point was that it's wrong to add a separate entry-tree CPU
> cost estimation to another estimation, which tries (very inadequately) to
> estimate the whole scan cost. Instead, I propose writing better estimations
> for both entry-tree CPU cost and data-trees CPU cost and replacing existing
> CPU estimation altogether.

Great idea, if someone is willing to do it ...

			regards, tom lane